Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Review reveals the trade-offs of reducing agricultural nitrogen inputs in crop production, indicating that optimizing nitrogen use efficiency better balances food security with environmental health.
Nitrogen is an essential element for plant growth and, consequently, crop production. However, the cycling of nitrogen in the environment can have negative effects. Here, we review the historical development of scientific and public awareness of these effects and the influence this has had on political action to control them. Focusing on Germany as an example, we explore past nitrogen myths and how scientific progress has dispelled them, contextualizing our current position as a society seeking sufficient food, a clean environment, and an end to climate change. Given the continuous heavy burden placed on farmers to solve all these issues, we argue that from the state that we have reached today, further reducing nitrogen inputs for crop production may not necessarily lead to a further reduction in nitrogen cycling in the environment but rather to reductions in yields and product quality. Nevertheless, there is still potential to improve the efficiency of nitrogen use for stabilizing crop yields and to increase resilience against potential harm to the environment and human health. We make a couple of suggestions about what can be done.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mielenz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: